Understandably, given recent events, I haven't felt much like posting, but this morning, I ran across an article that's worth reading for two reasons
. One is that the topic-- journalistic reporting of science versus pseudoscience-- is one that's close to my heart. Figuring out what's science and what's superstition or simply junk is harder than you might think. Mass public science-literacy is a missing link in making any real progress on environmental issues in the US, and worse, its absence leads to shameful situations like teaching of creationism in biology classes. Secondly, the article features Scott Gold, whom I knew as a child because his mother and mine were roommates in college. Very small world. You can really see the rock and the hard place that Scott was wedged into here, and I really respect his willingness to speak truth to power on the cancer/abortion issue.